onepiecefandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Ami Ami no Mi
Paramecia It's kinda a paramecia since it uses multiple elements transformed into nets. Also, while in the preview, it shows Largo turning into a net, it doesn't show attacks going through him.Mugiwara Franky 07:07, November 29, 2009 (UTC) :PS:Being a Logia doesnt mean to let attacks pas through you like Ao Kiji.. ::#Sign your posts with ~~~~ ::#Editing of others' posts are a buig fat "no" currently while the matter is settled on our forum. ::#Altering posts to say something else OTHER then what it said orginally is taken as offensive. ::Please be aware of this in future and don't repeat. One-Winged Hawk 19:58, December 5, 2009 (UTC) ::A Logia Devil Fruit is a Devil Fruit that allows the user to become an element of nature. A net is not an element of nature. It is a man made object created by tying ropes or strings.Mugiwara Franky 02:39, December 6, 2009 (UTC) :::I don't think it has to be an "element of nature"; just some object that they can fully transform into, like smoke. However, I do agree that in this case it's definitely Paramecia. The Pope 04:12, December 6, 2009 (UTC) Okay, it's confirmed to be definitely a Paramecia in Episode 429 proper. It being a Logia is definitely a misconception of 429's preview. In the preview, it showed Largo turning into a net with fleshy coloring. People thought that this was him becoming a net similar to his saliva. This is not the case as the net he becomes is a fleshy net.Mugiwara Franky 04:47, December 6, 2009 (UTC) This Fruit is Canon?? Fuwa Fuwa no Mi is canon because Shiki appears in manga by Oda. But Largo is an anime-ONLY character. As you know, Oda did not think about the anime-original fruit. 10th movie was made by Oda, but there is not the evidence that the episode about Little East Blue in anime was thought about by Oda. That's why I think that this fruit and Little East Blue are not canon.--Klobis 09:11, February 27, 2010 (UTC) :Its like the logue town fillers, Daddy Masterson may be an Oda original, but the anime did things their way. So I think you're right in that aspect. Even if Oda precieved them, he never included them in Chapter 0. One-Winged Hawk 09:32, March 2, 2010 (UTC) ::Chapter 0 is technically an introduction chapter to the movie. It includes the basics of the movie but not every character and aspect of the movie is included in it. Characters like Billy and Scarlet, stuff like Shiki's floating ship, and other stuff aren't included in the chapter. ::For the Amigo Pirates and the rest of Little East Blue, they may not have been in Chapter 0 but their tie with the movie itself is a question. Were they really thought up by the anime crew or did Oda designed them as supplement to the movie? For the answer to this question and probably a definite evidence, it would've been more proper if there was a clip, a line cited from the movie, or a summary of sorts from someone who saw the movie to show whether that Little East Blue was non-canon or not. ::Examples: ::"Throughout the movie, Little East Blue was not mentioned." ::or ::"In this part, this character mentions Largo and his crew." ::I'm just gonna let this slide despite there being no proper written agreement to changing all the related subjects to Non-Canon. It's a gray area due to stuff. However, it would've been more proper if the changes were made after there was at least one response to when the topic began. No response to a proposal doesn't always mean acceptance.Mugiwara Franky 12:16, March 2, 2010 (UTC) Translations The "Techniques" section translates "mucho" with different meanings, namely "really", "very" and "many". However, "mucho" only translates as "much" ("really" and "very" are "muy", and "many" is "muchos"). This means those are not really the literal translations of the techniques, in Spanish they actually make no sense; for example, "Mucho Tetsujo Mo" translates as "Much Wire Entanglements", and not as "Many Wire Entanglements". Should I change the translations to their true literal meanings even if they lose meaning by doing it?--Manuel de la Fuente (talk) 13:16, June 28, 2016 (UTC)